DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 11, and 20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nater et al., US 2021/0133988.
Regarding claim 1, Nater discloses a system (fig. 2; para 0005; systems and methods for detecting objects added or removed within defined regions of a scene monitored by a video camera) comprising:
one or more memories (fig. 2; elements 114 and 215; para 0032 and 0040; electronic media storage device and memory); and
at least one processor coupled to at least one of the one or more memories and configured to perform operations (fig. 2; elements 112 and 210; para 0032 and 0040; processors) comprising:
receive a first trigger corresponding to a first motion event within a field of view of a first image sensor (para 0049-0050; the video camera system 100 may detect motion in the monitored scene 300; the processor 112 of the video camera 110 may be coupled to the one or more devices or sensors…and receive motion detection signals; motion detected within the monitored scene 300 may be analyzed);
select a first video frame from a sequence of video frames captured by the first image sensor, wherein the first video frame is captured prior to the first trigger (para 0051-0052; The computer 120 may select one or multiple static video frames from the video frames captured by the video camera 110 before the motion is detected in the defined zone 310; Buffered video recorded prior to motion detection may be referred to herein as “pre-roll video”);
select a second video frame from the sequence of video frames captured by the first image sensor, wherein the second video frame is captured after the first trigger (para 0051-0052; The computer 120 may select one or multiple static video frames from the video frames captured by the video camera 110 after the motion is detected in the defined zone 310 has ended for static analysis; video recorded after detected motion has ended may be referred to herein as “post-roll video.”);
determine at least one difference between the first video frame and the second video frame (para 0053-0054; the static analysis of the pre-roll static video frames and the post-roll static video frames may include, for example, but not limited to, comparing raw pixel values of the frames, determining statistics of pixels over some or all of the frames, analyzing edges or other image features related to the frames, etc. Changes in light levels, pets sitting in the identified zone, etc., may also be detected; determining a difference in composition between the pre-roll and post-roll frames), wherein the first video frame and the second video frame are non-sequential video frames of the sequence of video frames (para 0103-0104; the first set and/or the second set of video frames can each include…continuous (successive) or discontinuous (not successive) frames; determine the difference between the first set of video frames and the second set of video frames within the zone);
determine, based on the at least one difference, at least one of an object classification and an event classification (para 0054 and 0077; classification of an object, for example a car, detected as a change in the composition of the defined zone between the pre-roll static video frames and the post-roll static video frames may be performed; corresponding event examples: car parked or car departed based on the difference in composition); and
generate a notification that corresponds to the object classification or the event classification (para 0064 and 0077; when the video camera system 100 detects that an object has been added or removed from a defined zone, a notification to the user may be generated; when a difference is detected and a car is parked, a notification may be generated, and similarly when a car is departed, a notification may be generated).
Regarding claim 2, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
determine an end time for the first motion event, wherein the second video frame is captured after the end time (para 0051-0052).
Regarding claim 3, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
receive a second trigger corresponding to a second motion event within the field of view of the first image sensor (para 0102);
select a third video frame from the sequence of video frames captured by the first image sensor, wherein the third video frame is captured after the second trigger (para 0105-0109);
determine a change between the second video frame and the third video frame (para 0105-0109); and
determine whether the change is present between the first video frame and the third video frame (para 0105-0109).
Regarding claim 4, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein to determine the at least one difference between the first video frame and the second video frame the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
categorize a set of regions within the first video frame and the second video frame (para 003-0039); and
compare at least one region from the set of regions within the first video frame with a corresponding region from the set of regions within the second video frame (para 0059).
Regarding claim 5, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein to determine the at least one difference between the first video frame and the second video frame the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
generate a first representation of the first video frame and a second representation of the second video frame, wherein the first representation and the second representation each include one or more region labels (para 0051-0052, 0054, 0072-006); and
compare the first representation with the second representation to determine the at least one difference (para 0053-0054 and 0103-0104).
Regarding claim 6, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein to determine the at least one difference between the first video frame and the second video frame the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
perform a background subtraction between the first video frame and the second video frame (para 0050, 0054, and 0056).
Regarding claim 7, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
determine that the at least one difference between the first video frame and the second video frame corresponds to a difference in ambient lighting that exceeds a maximum threshold (para 0053 and 0111);
in response to determining that the difference in ambient lighting exceeds the maximum threshold, select a third video frame from the sequence of video frames captured by the first image sensor (para 0111-0112); and
compare at least one of the first video frame and the second video frame to the third video frame to identify one or more differences (para 0111-0112).
Regarding claim 8, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform operations comprising:
send the notification of the event classification to one or more image sensors that are associated with the first image sensor (para 0036 and 0063-0064).
Regarding claim 9, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein the object classification corresponds to at least one of a new object, a deleted object, and a moved object (para 0061, 0090, 0097, and 0104).
Regarding claim 10, the system of claim 1, Nater further discloses wherein the event classification corresponds to at least one of a delivery event, an egress event, an ingress event, and a trespass event (para 0030, 0061, 0077, 0110, and 0112).
Regarding claim 11, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 1 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 12, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 2 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 3 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 4 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 15, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 5 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 16, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 6 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 17, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 7 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 18, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 8 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 19, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claims 9-10 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20, this claim recites substantially the same limitations that are performed by claim 1 above, and it is rejected for the same reasons.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAN D HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)270-1937. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-6PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Stephen R Koziol can be reached at (408) 918-7630. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VAN D HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2665
Prosecution Insights